• InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    She was in charge of keeping things safe, she failed in her responsibilities and someone died. She is at fault and should face the consequences.

    • dellish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I know right. The logic seems to be “well he didn’t get charged for it so I shouldn’t be either”. Yeah, but keeping weapons safe was your job, not his.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The case was dismissed because of misconduct by the police and prosecutors. It has nothing to do with being charged, he was charged. She’s saying the same thing happened in her case, so if his case was dismissed so should her conviction. So yeah, if the same misconduct happened, then it should obviously be overturned too.

        And make no mistake about it, if you accidentally caused the death of someone, you would be looking for every opportunity to have the case dismissed too.

        • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          You think it was an accident? It was an accident she didn’t do her job? It wasn’t an accident, it was negligence.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Negligence and accidental are not mutually exclusive. Unless youre arguing that she intentionally had this person killed, my point still stands.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      What’s the ultimate goal? If it’s purely punitive, then sure.

      But if the goal is anything other than that, I don’t see the point. It’s not any rehabilitation she needs would come in prison. It’s not like anyone who look at this and say “well, I can be careless and just bank on the cops fucking up,” so the deterrence is already there. And I can think of hundreds of better ways she can make it up to the victims.

      So is that it? Is it really just about “facing the consequences?”

      • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        At what point do you think people should be held accountable for their actions? Her negligence CAUSED a death. She only got 18 months in jail and that’s too much?

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          At what point do you think people should be held accountable for their actions?

          My view is very pragmatic: I believe punishments for crimes should be restorative, for rehabilitation, or act as a deterrent. I don’t see how any of these are met by her going to jail for 18 months.

          I’ve answered your question, so I’ll try mine again: Is it simply about “being held accountable”?

          • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            It is. If there is no punishment for getting someone killed, then why would anyone give a shit at their job that involves safety? Airplane mechanics are held responsible for their failures, should we throw that out the window and when they forget to tighten down a bolt that drops a plane just say whelp, better luck next time, lets get George some more training and hope he follows the procedures that are in place to prevent that from ever happening again.

            If there is no consequence, then there is no need for rules and laws.

            • sushibowl@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 month ago

              Airplane mechanics are held responsible for their failures, should we throw that out the window and when they forget to tighten down a bolt that drops a plane just say whelp, better luck next time, lets get George some more training and hope he follows the procedures that are in place to prevent that from ever happening again.

              You are joking, but that’s almost exactly what happens. Aircraft investigations are universally conducted on the basis of not assigning blame, but figuring out how to prevent this in the future.

              The point is that airplane mechanics generally do not forget to tighten bolts out of pure evil intent. They are for the most part just ordinary humans who can be expected to behave as such. Therefore when an error occurs it is a failure of the system, not them personally. Replacing them with another human who makes human mistakes doesn’t fix anything.

              In this case we ask the same thing: what happened that caused things to go so wrong on this set, and what can we change to prevent that from happening again? I’m quite certain that putting this person in jail is not the answer to that question.

              • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                In this case we ask the same thing: what happened that caused things to go so wrong on this set, and what can we change to prevent that from happening again?

                What happened? She didn’t do her job.

                How do you prevent it from happening again? Make sure there are repercussions for not doing your job. Something like maybe jail? That’s a pretty big deterrent.

                Edit: I’m not big on sending people to jail. I do believe sex crimes, and violent crimes are 100% jail worthy. Drugs, theft shit like that, no. If you get someone killed because you didn’t follow what you are contracted to do, then yeah, I think you need to go to jail. Not for years, but 18 months, that might be a little long but it’s not unfair. You took a life.

                • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Something you may have missed from one of EatATaco’s earlier comments:

                  It’s not like anyone who look at this and say “well, I can be careless and just bank on the cops fucking up,” so the deterrence is already there.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              First time I downvoted you in this thread because …

              If there is no punishment for getting someone killed, then why would anyone give a shit at their job that involves safety?

              I explicitly covered this by saying noone is going to think “well, I’ll just be careless and bank on cops or prosecutors screwing up the case” so the deterrence factor is still there. Well, if there is someone that dumb, I doubt any deterrence is going to stop them.

    • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      What will it help? She will stay dead and another life is destroyed? It will not prevent it from happening again, more than the death of an innocent person.